Social Media Police: The Way of the Future

Being careful about what you post online is a lesson that many people have had to learn the hard way, whether it be for applying for a job, avoiding stalkers, or simply trying to stay in the good graces of your significant other’s family. Now it appears as if there is another interested party looking at your Facebook pictures: insurance companies. Insurance investigators are looking at user profiles on social media sites to analyze liability, and it appears that anything public is fair game. For example, if someone enjoys skydiving or spelunking and frequently posts pictures about it, they could face negative repercussions as to what their insurance coverage looks like. In a world where companies are able to pull all of the data about yourself from online and construct a timeline of your life, this development is no surprise; however, it does highlight the caution people should take when they make posts online.

Personally, I am not sure whether or not this is going too far. It is somewhat difficult to emphasize with the consumer argument that these sort of practices are intrusive when the content itself is being posted to a public forum. While it is very easy to tell people to just be smart about what they post, a more realistic solution might be for people to look at their privacy settings for each of their social media accounts and to adjust accordingly. It has gotten to the point where if anything posted on social media contradicts with information you have disclosed previously, you could face damaging consequences. As great as social media is in connecting people and allowing them to share experiences, developments like this shed a light on how it can be used against people.

Netflix Ads: Are They Worth It?

It is fairly common knowledge that a significant reason why people are choosing Netflix as their primary content provider is that there are no advertisements. That is wonderful from a consumer standpoint, but have you ever considered how much the streaming service is turning down to maintain its ad-free platform?

A report recently published by the website Extreamist claims that Netflix is losing upwards of two billion dollars annually by not allowing ads, based on calculations with the averages of Netflix watch time, television ad time, and money spent on television ads. Now whether or not the conclusions this article comes to are accurate, it does raise the question of whether Netflix should seriously consider ad spots with their programming.

Netflix is infamous for not releasing data on how well its programming performs, so it is difficult to gauge if advertising would be effective with this service. Also, as stated previously, many people choose Netflix because of the lack of ads. Who knows what would happen to Netflix’s subscriber numbers if ads were introduced.  The report also brought up a survey that was conducted which showed that a majority of the participants would prefer hire monthly fees over ads. All that being said, leadership from Netflix has expressed great interest in expanding its library of original content to becoming half of the total content available. That is not a cheap investment, and Netflix needs to maintain constant vigilance with its finances if it wants to not only be a streaming service, but also a production company. Revenue gained from ads could help fund more original content.

To be fair, nobody from Netflix has stated any intent to introduce ads; the report is completely based on theoretical circumstances. Netflix is not hurting financially by any means, but looking for more ways to increase revenue is a logical move for any business to make. It does appear that Netflix is going to continue its current approach, at least for the time being. I think it would be very interesting to perform a more in-depth analysis of what drives people to choose Netflix, and if either higher fees or ads would drive them away. 

The Art of Movie Review Embargoes

Have you ever been curious about the reviews for an upcoming film and decided to go to a website like Rotten Tomatoes to see its score, only to find that there are no reviews up for it yet? This seems to be the case more and more often, due to film studios relying heavily on review embargoes. A review embargo is when studios allow film critics to watch early screenings of a film on the condition that the critics release their reviews at a date that is set by the studio. For most films coming out today, embargoes are lifted just days before they are released.

Review embargoes are a tool that studios utilize in order to maximize public turnout for movies. If the embargo for a new Star Wars movie lifted on the Wednesday before its Friday opening, then suddenly the internet would be filled with content about the movie, typically causing great traction on social media. However, there is a more cynical reason for review embargoes.Certain films have review embargoes that are set for the very day that those films are released. Why? The answer is simple: the studio has no confidence in the film performing well critically, and is trying to suppress negative reviews for as long as possible so that they do not keep people away from the theater.

I understand the need for embargoes up to a certain point. Particularly for the tent-pole blockbusters, it makes sense that film studios want to have reviews up at the same time to receive the greatest amount of buzz. I also understand to a lesser extent the wish to protect spoilers until a film is out. However, the need to suppress overwhelming negative reviews until the last minute, while logical, just feels dishonest to me. I really wonder how much the general public understands about how film review embargoes operate, and if they have a significant effect on people who are not necessarily movie-buffs.